Opinion

Garson v. Rapping

498 N.Y.S.2d 796 · New York Court of Appeals · Dec 17, 1985

Full text

Hermina Garson v. Lowell S. Rapping, as of Percy Garson

[931] OPINION OF THE COURT Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division (105 AD2d 726). We add only that the cpurt properly applied the limited exception to the rule of strict compliance with the requirements of the Business Corporation Law (see, e.g., Matter of Rye Psychiatric Hosp. Center, 66 NY2d 333) recognized in Zion v Kurtz (50 NY2d 92, 102, rearg denied 50 NY2d 1060). Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Alexander. Taking no part: Judge Titone.

Notice

Freecase is a legal research tool. It does not determine whether a case is good law and does not provide legal advice.

Metadata

Status: Published
Author
Judges: Not listed
Cluster ID: 5688077

Citations

498 N.Y.S.2d 796
1985 N.Y. LEXIS 18238
66 N.Y.2d 928
489 N.E.2d 765

Cited by

Matter of Loreti v. Lorcress Enters., Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Aug 27, 2025
Matter of Loreti v. JJL Realty Corp. of N.Y.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Aug 27, 2025
Matter of Loreti v. 1466 E. Gun Hill Rd. Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Aug 27, 2025
Ivchenko v. Clean Air Technologies International, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Feb 7, 2003
Cannavino v. Davis
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Dec 17, 2001